Bill Clinton: Slowing Economy Good For Environment?

In a long, and interesting speech, he characterized what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do to combat global warming this way: "We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions 'cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren."

At a time that the nation is worried about a recession is that really the characterization his wife would want him making? "Slow down our economy"?

I don't really think there's much debate that, at least initially, a full commitment to reduce greenhouse gases would slow down the economy….So was this a moment of candor?

He went on to say that his the U.S. -- and those countries that have committed to reducing greenhouse gases -- could ultimately increase jobs and raise wages with a good energy plan..

So there was something of a contradiction there.

I'll say. For someone whose mantra was "it's the economy, stupid," Bill Clinton surely doesn't appear to get it, or being in a most charitable mood that he was simply confused and misspoke.

Does this mean that the current slow economy is a good thing because it means less greenhouse gases are being produced? If so, kudos to President Bush for being ahead of the curve.

Seriously though, there's nothing really good about a slow economy. It means that innovations come slower and capital is not being expended on research, development, and improvements.

Clinton is also firmly in the Al Gore global warming camp, which puts him at odds with the scientists, but which counts for more - scientists with hard science, or Al Gore?

UPDATE:
Or, is this Bill's attempt to provide Hillary with cover should the economy go sour during her Presidency - a bad economy is actually good for the environment.

If that were only the case. And let's just ignore the fact that China continues to ruin the environment at a tremendous clip (and threatens the health of those who are going to participate in the Olympics because of the toxic fumes spewing forth from China's factories, homes, and power plants). Let's also ignore the science suggesting that solar output affects climate change far more than any man made factors (after all, is man responsible for global warming on Mars?).